Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-14-2007, 06:54 PM   #1
Veteran Member
raider's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,961
Do you accept your picture is slightly blurr?

Just want to get some feedbacks here.

I took many many photos using handheld (SR=on) and no tripod. I would not say I have "very unsteady" hands. However, most of the photos when zoom to say 1024 x 768 resolutions, the picture appears to be sharp but when zoom further in, it is apparent that there are some motion blur.

What I would like to know is that are there any others who experience the same thing? If so, would you discard these photos and labelled them a failure, or ignore the slight blur altogether?

I have seen many ppl's photos using handheld (SR=on), no tripod, and the pics appear to be really sharp (even when zoom in)! I just find it frustrating that I can't duplicate their skills myself.

What would be the slowest shutter speed (using SR=on, no tripod) that will (almost) guarantee a sharp picture?

Thanks

10-14-2007, 07:16 PM   #2
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,644
I guess going by the old rule of thumb, Shoot the focal length (500mm shoot at 1/500th) I try to shoot no more than 3 stops below that rule with SR. Also when the lens is short like a 18-55mm kit at 18mm. You should use the rule for the longer length. On my old LX the meter would tell you that 1/30th of a second was in the zone that required a tripod no matter what the lens. So just because the lens is a 20mm doesn`t mean you can shoot a speed equivalent to that focal length.

That being said I've taken many far below that and gotten decent results. I'm not saying this is your style but I know for myself Digital has sometimes makes me lazy. Forgetting the basics because I don't have to worry about the cost of film, composing the shot because I can crop it later and shooting technique because SR will save me, etc.

Good camera technique still has a lot to do with the end result. Holding the camera correctly, shooting at the end of a breath. Having a stable shooting stance, tucking in the elbows to the body etc. The main thing is when possible, taking the time to shoot slowly, fire the shutter gently. SR can't do it all and technique combined with good habits will get a better shot all the time.

As for those questionable shots. I keep them all in a file. unless it`s total garbage or testing shots I keep them. They don`t take up that much space on today`s hard drives so they may have a use some other day.

Last edited by Peter Zack; 10-14-2007 at 07:37 PM.
10-14-2007, 07:50 PM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oaxaca, Mexico
Posts: 247
Edward Weston took a portrait of Orozco, president of Mexico, that was praised. The picture is a tad blurry because of camera shake due to the lateness of the day and the waning light. Edward Weston said of the photo that it was "practically satisfactory."

I had a picture of a man dancing in a street festival that was a big blurry and that bothered me but a gentlemen selecting photos for an exhibit insisted on that one. Okay.
10-15-2007, 09:05 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,903
QuoteOriginally posted by raider Quote
Just want to get some feedbacks here.

I took many many photos using handheld (SR=on) and no tripod. I would not say I have "very unsteady" hands. However, most of the photos when zoom to say 1024 x 768 resolutions, the picture appears to be sharp but when zoom further in, it is apparent that there are some motion blur.

What I would like to know is that are there any others who experience the same thing? If so, would you discard these photos and labelled them a failure, or ignore the slight blur altogether?

I have seen many ppl's photos using handheld (SR=on), no tripod, and the pics appear to be really sharp (even when zoom in)! I just find it frustrating that I can't duplicate their skills myself.

What would be the slowest shutter speed (using SR=on, no tripod) that will (almost) guarantee a sharp picture?

Thanks
I think you have answered your own question, it is all a matter of how big you intend to print.

There are a few issues you need to address,
- first, is the ratio of shutter speed over focal length,
- second is the focus, and how much you have stopped down the lens. Remember that if you are shooting wide open, only a portion of your subject, at the exact focusing distance is in focus, everything else will be slightly out of focus.
- third, is the use of a flash. No matter what shutter speed, some objects especially things that move, will be slightly blury. a flash on the other hand, is measured in terms of microseconds, or 10's of microseconds, this can really freeze the image, and also allow for smaller apatures and better depth of field.

to illustrate, I have attached 2 images, one shot (chickadee) with a 500mm Equivelent, stopped down several stops, and shot with a flash at 1/150th of a second and no shake reduction (*istD), the other (Blue Jay) with a 300mm equivelent shot wide open at 1/30th with shake reduction.

Attached Images
   
01-13-2008, 01:22 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: U.K.
Posts: 685
The rule of thumb is different for APS-C size sensors, 300mm would need 1/450sec. SR adds a reliable 2 stops say, so 1/125sec should work well most of the time. The best I can manage at 300mm on my K100D is 1/60sec for 100% view sharpness perhaps 50% or more success rate, 1/125sec is pretty much guaranteed to be sharp.
01-13-2008, 03:28 PM   #6
PDL
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,870
I am in the same boat - sometimes - as Peter Zack. I just get lazy and act as if I am in a hurry. I also tend to punch the shutter button - most times when I am in a supposed hurry - which I tend to be. Not that I am under time constraints - but I punch and look for the next shot. Most of my blurry images are my fault not the cameras’ (K10d) and I appear to be relying way too much on SR to cover my eroding technique.

Now, that said - when I do chimp - I get rid of the images that show such blur that I can see it on the LCD - the number of images does seem to be going up these days. SR can only cover motion that is in the x, y and rotational elements of an image. I am finding that I move forward and backward - which SR can not do anything about.

At present I delete images that show histograms that are either so far to either side, clipped badly or look blurry in the LCD. I have found my self in the same situation as the OP - getting a marginal shot and being able to pull image out of it. So, in the end - I do not delete anything except the most egregious cr*p. I also copy everything and burn it to DVD before I really get down to picking shots for further consideration.

The Elitist - formerly known as PDL
01-13-2008, 04:00 PM   #7
Pentaxian
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,784
If it is an image that can not be reasonably taken again - live with it.
01-13-2008, 07:52 PM   #8
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,948
http://www.saegilchurch.or.kr/bbs/data/gallery/Behind_the_Gare_Saint_Lazare1932.jpg

01-13-2008, 09:35 PM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,451
Vive Cartier-Bresson!
01-13-2008, 09:54 PM   #10
Senior Member
almo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Flawda
Posts: 101
That's a good question with no single good answer. In my case I will except some "less than sharp" images, but this is typically due to missed focus, rather than blur. However, blur or missed focus, it depends on the merrit of the subject, the over all quality of the image, what the chances of my being able to reshoot, an the intended use of the image are in order for me to make the choice to keep or dump.

Here are a few samples of missed focus/ slightly blured images that I chose to keep, and why.

A very recent shot of an Inca Tern. Even though the eye is sharp, the DOF is such that almost nothing else is. I felt that the personality of this shot warranted keeping it.


Here are a couple of Osprey shots. The first is blured due to a failed pan attempt. The second has motion blur, though you can see the focus is spot on. I kept both of these shots because even though I live in an arae where these birds are common, it is not very often taht i get a chance to shoot them.




This last image speaks for itself. I had to keep it. I mean, how often, outside of a zoo, do you see much less get the chance to photograph a scene like this. I tell you, only in Florida... This was a low light situation, at full tele, 300mm, with no tripod. I had to use the window of my truck as a brace.
01-14-2008, 10:15 AM   #11
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,903
I like osprey shots also, and in my area although not rare, they are not as abundant as in florida, for example.

In the first shot, I like the hovering pose, it's just too bad yoou couldn't capture the head from a different angle,

what do you think of this. Slightly blurred, but great angle.
Attached Images
 
01-14-2008, 06:25 PM   #12
Senior Member
almo's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Flawda
Posts: 101
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I like osprey shots also, and in my area although not rare, they are not as abundant as in florida, for example.

In the first shot, I like the hovering pose, it's just too bad yoou couldn't capture the head from a different angle,

what do you think of this. Slightly blurred, but great angle.
Oh totally! I'da kept it.
01-14-2008, 10:06 PM   #13
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 36
QuoteOriginally posted by almo Quote
A very recent shot of an Inca Tern. Even though the eye is sharp, the DOF is such that almost nothing else is. I felt that the personality of this shot warranted keeping it.
I am not so sure that the fact that everything outside the eye is out of focus slighly drawing my view into the eye of the bird, is not what makes this picture so compelling. I really like it, the way it draws my focus into the eye is great.
01-14-2008, 11:12 PM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 475
Out of focus, motion blur, etc. doesn't matter if I like what I've captured. I have a number of favorites that aren't technically great, but make me happy nonetheless.
01-15-2008, 05:58 AM   #15
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,903
QuoteOriginally posted by betsypdx Quote
Out of focus, motion blur, etc. doesn't matter if I like what I've captured. I have a number of favorites that aren't technically great, but make me happy nonetheless.
I think you have just defined the barrier between technical perfection and art.

As an aside, and many responders here, myself included, shoot wild life, have a couple of different issues,
-first, with fast lenses wide open, depth of field is near zero, as a result the typical approach is the eye needs to be sharp,
-second, things move, and even if one part of the photo is stationary and sharp(eg the head) wings may be sweeping in an arc showing motion, This is again the product of low light and the trade off between depth of field and shutter speed
-third, many (myself included) possibly only have one shot at something, and the shot may not be perfedt, but suitable for identification. I like shooting birds, and also keep a list of how many different species I have seen. I have migrated to the approach where if I can't photograph it, I didn't see it. This is partly because many identifying traits are so subtle, that you may need more time looking at the bird than it stays on the branch (or what ever) A photo is great for this, even if not technically perfect.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
blur, camera, photography, photos, picture, tripod
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help! K10D doesn't accept my 135-600mm F6.8 baby fiathriel Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 06-18-2013 07:21 PM
can K-X accept M mount 50mm F1.2? surfmanjoe Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 07-21-2010 03:04 PM
A slightly different dog picture brkl Post Your Photos! 2 09-11-2009 09:23 AM
Lightroom accept Pentax - TRUE? marius Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 4 08-10-2008 02:42 PM
K100D won't accept new Sigma lens?! jdpenk100d Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 03-04-2007 01:24 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:21 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top